turtledovefandomcom-20200216-history
Category talk:Queen Consorts
"This category is for queen consorts." After making a big deal that the plural of Queen Regnant is Queens Regnant, are we sure it's not Queens Consort? It may well not be, but since we've called attention to the proper pluralization, we could stand to be embarrassed if we get it wrong here. Turtle Fan 21:51, February 28, 2011 (UTC) :From everything I can tell, it is Queen Consorts. TR 21:56, February 28, 2011 (UTC) "Historically, queen consorts do not share the king regent's political and military powers, as opposed to queens regnant, who rule in their own right." True, of course, though I am reminded of one rather notable exception, the Battle of Flodden Field. Catherine of Aragon assumed the monarchical prerogative and led the English army to the decisive victory which forced Scotland out of the War of the League of Cambrai, which in turn weakened the Auld Alliance considerably. It was the largest battle in terms of numbers involved ever fought between England and Scotland. It was the last large-scale engagement fought on the island of Britain in which the firearm did not feature prominently. (There would be later battles in Ireland where the firearm was not a factor, so one can't say it was the last such battle in the British Isles.) King James IV was killed on the field, which I would argue was (ironically, perhaps) an essential ingredient to the personal union ninety years later which predicted the founding of the United Kingdom. James's death allowed Henry VIII's sister, Princess Margaret, to remarry while she was still young and fertile. She married Archibald Douglas (the son of another prominent Scots casualty at Flodden Field) and their marriage produced Margaret Douglas. Margaret Douglas's marriage to Matthew Stewart produced Lord Darnley, and Lord Darnley's marriage to Mary, Queen of Scots produced James VI and I. Had Mary's child been fathered by someone who was not a descendant of Henry VII and Elizabeth of York, he would have had only one claim on the English throne after the Tudor line failed, and that claim no stronger than that of Arabella Stuart or the Viscount Beauchamp or William Stanley. Having a double dose of royal blood was an invaluable trump card which James's friends in London played against supporters of other claimants. Furthermore, in the aftermath of Flodden, Catherine's popularity at home soared to heights not seen for an English queen consort in centuries--probably not since Eleanor of Aquitaine. This popularity would later make it quite hard for Henry, Thomas Boleyn, Cardinal Wolsey, Thomas Cromwell, the Duke of Norfolk, and the others to put Catherine out. English public opinion among the commoners was very much in Catherine's favor: Think of the public's biased reaction to the divorce of Charles and Diana for a comparable scenario. Combine this with the fact that Catherine had also proven herself a pretty fair general at Flodden Field and you can see why Henry started getting damned nervous when his wife refused to go quietly. I would argue that it was at this point that he took his first steps from enlightened humanist to autocratic tyrant. Really, that battle's importance to British history cannot be overstated. Alas, it shares the sixteenth century with innumerable other events which were comparably important and much more sexy and dramatic, so it gets forgotten. Turtle Fan 21:51, February 28, 2011 (UTC) ......ok. TR 21:56, February 28, 2011 (UTC) :I do get long-winded about these things, don't I. Turtle Fan 21:59, February 28, 2011 (UTC) :I didn't want you to feel as if I'd ignored what you wrote, but I have/had nothing of value to add. TR 22:22, February 28, 2011 (UTC)